2. analog
  3. 1219677256

Our home system: How good it is?

My music sound philosophy/reference is the live music/event that unfortunately I can’t mimic on my system or in any other audio system that I heard. I always say that the very best we can achieve is to be nearer to the recording and even this target is a little “ elusive “ to get for say the least.

Through my audio life I heard a lot of different audio systems: I heard it on audio shows, on dealer rooms and on home people’s systems.

With out any doubt the best audio system performances that I already experienced were/are on home systems where I learn several subjects ( including the people music sound priorities ) and one-two of them are the in deep care in the SET UP of each link on the whole audio chain ( including room ). Some of high price systems that I heard it are not very good because its “ lesser “ care on the each link SET UP.

I want to share with all of you my latest experiences that I had 2-3 weeks ago when I visit some audio friends on USA.
I was exposed to 7 different home systems and I share with you my thoughts on only 4 of those home audio systems that I consider have nothing less but top/first rate performance and where I really enjoy the music.

First than all I want to say that all those audio friends were very gentle and with a very high sense on hospitality: thank you in deep to every one for that I really appreciate it in every way including your very value time that you take/give me.

The best subject during my visit to each one of those great people was to know/meet them: meet people with an in deep knowledge on music ( music lovers more than hardware lovers.), with in deep audio experiences, with in deep know how on their each priorities, with in deep care on whole room-system SET UP, with a great software, with an open mind to share and to accept different points of view, with in deep understanding that there are no perfect systems, with a “ humility “ attitude that it is a must to have to grow-up and with the enjoy “ feeling “ of music listening.

This was a very rare opportunity that I enjoy it and that I know I was so lucky about: Thank you again to all of you!!!!

In no order of preference here it is:

HOUSTON: Fred’s place with a dedicated audio room. Acapella big Triolon speakers, Einstein front end electronics, Rockport/Titan i analog rig, Nordost, JC-1s amps, etc.

When the first music note comes from this system you know that it is something special and after a few minutes you forgot about the hardware and start to enjoy fully the software ( either analog/digital ).
The system is so easy to transmit the music “ feelings/emotions “ and let that the sound/music flow directly to your mind.

Those Triorlon are really great and my hat off to Acapella people because they blend three different speaker drivers in an almost perfect mix. I don’t like ( but the immediacy ) horns ( I heard many of them ) and the Triorlon’s has two of them in the midrange frequency range and I have to say that these horns are the lower horn-signature that I ever heard, the mid bass/bass are moving coil drivers and the Plasma tweeter is ( probably ) the speaker star but with out saying “ I’m here “, like I say almost perfect driver blend.

BOISE: Steve’s place with a dedicated audio room. MBL 111 speakers, custom made Berning’s monoblock amplifiers, Technics SP10 MK3 with a Steve self design/build gorgeous plinth with Schroeder Reference tonearm and strain gauge cartridge/front end by Soundsmith and Lyra Olimpos.

This was my three time that I heard MBL speakers and my first time on a home system: what a difference!!!!, these system/speakers are so near the real music that, like in Fred’s system, the only think that you want is to hear music and more music: LP after LP and again!!!!

Those custom made amplifiers are very good match to the MBL’s and has the lower coloration of tube-signature amplifier I ever heard. I know that the MBL speakers are not easy/friendly with tube electronics and in this system everything is on target, of course that Steve’s hand on this count a lot for that.

I experienced here two different quality performance sound: the Soundsmith one ( that is good ) and a MC cartridge one. I have to say that the Soundsmith rig was only 20-30 hours from new and even Steve was “ playing “ with the set-up. Anyway IMHO that day the Lyra quality performance was way better and I enjoy it for many hours. With this MC cartridge things ( great things ) come out specially the non-sense audio system: disappear!, I had only the LP music performance: great performances.

DALLAS: Louis’s place with a dedicated audio room. Kharma Exquisite 1A speakers, CAT’s monobloks ( new ones: 30 hours on it. ), Lamm/Aesthetix front end electronics, Garrad 301/Triplanar/Xv-1and Technics SP-10MK3/SME/Air Tight both with a custom made wood plinths and the 301 with a custom made power supply.

First thing you note at Loui’s place is that huge room, the biggest I ever know ( maybe 2.3 times the Steve or Fred ones that are big. ) in a home stereo system.

Here I think that the stars are those 550 pound each speakers and its room good integration ( not an easy task ). Like the other systems this one is different but really good. This is my second time hearing Kharma speakers and I have to say that are very very good performers.

The whole sound is a refined/sophisticated one where you or anyone are asking for more, not more quality but more time to heard/hear and enjoy music. I was surprised by the 301 rig quality performance ( where I know very well the XV-1 quality. ): first rate, I can’t hear any coloration that I can/could say: “ that’s was the 301 “.

As good as I heard that system Louis told me that through his Lamm amplifiers ( SE 15-18 watts ) the quality of the system’s sound is a step higher!!, unfortunately I can’t hear it with these amplifiers. Anyway a pleasure to hear it on the Cats.

SAN DIEGO: Mark’s place with out a dedicated audio room ( the system belongs to the sitting room ). Revel speakers, Threshold amplifier, Hovland front end electronics and Raven/Triplanar/Ruby 2.

It seems the “ modest “ system on the group but a top quality performer where we know immediately the very hard work that Mark made to achieve that high quality performance. I know very well the Ruby 2 and in this system is something to hear.
Here there is no single “ star “ but a very good set up of audio items group that sounds a lot better that some very high price systems that I heard, money means nothing at all with out whole/overall knowledge.

As different as are all these audio system all them share common things: system whole synergy, when you heard it you know everything is there ( soundstage, good tonal balance, inner detail, transparent, fast response, dynamics, etc, etc, ), nothing is telling you “ I’m here “ ( very well balance ), sounds good with different kind of music and at different SPL levels, you can heard it for many hours and enjoy every minute, etc, etc.

Are these audio system “ perfect “ ?, certainly not: nothing is. Their owners ( all of them ) already know that they have “ land “ to improve and more important that this fact is that all them know where to improve.

Something to “ ask “ to these systems?, well as you know I’m for full range ( octave to octave ) audio systems and if I put really exigent then I can say that all these system “ miss “ the last bass octave/half octave. This bass octave is system/room dependent and speaker design specification dependent: non of those speakers were designed to achieve that low bass frequency range with the same high quality of the other frequency ranges.
Anyway I can say that I never feel the necessity of that bass octave during all those many hours of music pleasure hearing all those audio systems.

It is a nice thing to learn, through other home audio system listening experiences, if what we have at home is in the right “ road “ and this fact help all of us to grow up in the quest of home audio music sound reproduction heaven.

Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Ag insider logo xs@2xrauliruegas
shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,477 posts
 
BTW - please forgive my lousy typing, and one more thing on Point 2) => you will notice listening position in studios tends to be far from the rear wall behind listener - most often with the engineer sitting in the front half of the room.

A good rule of thumb is the 38% room length rule - a listening position along the longest dimension of the room is often best at 38% of the length - studio engineers tend to sit forward in the 38% zone from the front of room whilst home listeners will probably get most enjoyment from sitting in the further 38% position from rear wall (this generally gives a more pleasing ambience and a broader more natural soundstage)

After staking out the best reflection free listening position in a room then it is a matter of finding optimum speaker placement.
halcro's avatar
halcro
2,664 posts
 
Thanks for the links Shadorne.
The PrimeAcoustic link is a bit lightweight and is tainted by a company selling the products however..........I can find no references to 'not placing your seat against a rear wall'?
The Ethan Winer article is another kettle of fish altogether. It is learned, full of science and accurate real-world information. It is a joy to read. Even though he appears to hold no formal acoustic qualifications and is head of RealTraps which sells the acoustic treatments he recommends, this man knows his 'onions'!
Filtering the information he provides unfortunately, is the fact that it is written primarily from the recording studio playback point of view. The fact that he recommends that ALL room surfaces including ceilings, should be absorbent alerts any knowing audiophile, and also the fact that he recommends ceiling-mounted speakers is a dead giveaway.....not that Ethan is making any apologies for that.
But if you seriously believe that the acoustics in a recording studio are what we should be aiming for in our home listening rooms, then I beg to differ.
Despite all of this, again nowhere could I find in Ethan's article any caveat about listening against a wall (other than, if you do, make it absorbent).
I can understand Shadorne, where, absorbing some of the facts presented, you may leap to the assumption that you have, but I propose that it is not born out by science, facts or acoustics. Nor is it born out by my listening experiences.
clio09
3,355 posts
 
I've done some extensive reading over on the Rives Acoustic forum on AA. In many of the posts you will find two primary participants, Ethan Winer and David Aiken. Both are very knowledgeable fellows when it comes to room acoustics and treating rooms.

One, Ethan, favors short wall placement of speakers and I believe the 38% rule, while the other, David, subscribes to the Audio Physics method which involves long wall placement of speakers and having your listening chair 1 - 3 ft. from the back wall (there are some other parts of the equation as well, including placement from the front wall and the fact that the speakers to do not have to be symmetrical with one another).

Due to room size and constraints up to recently I had my chair 1 - 3 ft. from the rear wall with absorption panels on that wall. I also use a combination of Eighth Nerve products through out the room. Now I have short wall placement of the speakers and sit closer to the front wall. I still use the Eighth Nerve products and also have recently purchased some of Ethan's Mini Traps which are well built and very effective. I use acoustic panels on the ceiling reflection points above and in front of the speakers as well (as Ethan suggests).

If I had my druthers I'd go back to the Audio Physic method which suits my tastes better, although my set up now sounds very good. The Audio Physic method allows the speakers to be further away from side walls reducing the effects of side wall (1st and 2nd) reflections. Being able to place the speakers 5 - 6 ft out into the room helps as well.

That's just my preference and as you would read on AA there really doesn't seem to be a fool proof method, short of investing a small fortune in building a custom dedicated listening room. For those of us whose listening rooms double as living rooms or dens, or if dedicated, are less than ideal in terms of dimensions and symmetry, we're left with trial and error and tradeoffs.
shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,477 posts
 
you may leap to the assumption that you have, but I propose that it is not born out by science, facts or acoustics.

No leap here. It is a fact that walls reflect acoustic waves - as shown in the animation on the first PrimeAcoustic link I gave you. If you sit next to a wall then you will get very strong reflections of whatever you are listening to - the closer the louder and the earlier the secondary reflection arrives - a large flat surface symmetrically opposite the speakers (wall behind the listener) being one of the loudest and most coherent reflection in any room. You can use absorption to reduce the impact but it has been shown that

1) lower mid bass and bass frequencies are very hard to absorb
2) that even low level early reflections can disrupt our sense of where a sound orignated from (affects imaging/soundstage).

The fact that he recommends that ALL room surfaces including ceilings, should be absorbent alerts any knowing audiophile, and also the fact that he recommends ceiling-mounted speakers is a dead giveaway.....

Good point - however, I never said I agree with everything Ethan ever said - I was just pointing out his web page about the importance of a "Reflection Free Zone" at the listening position.

But if you seriously believe that the acoustics in a recording studio are what we should be aiming for in our home listening rooms, then I beg to differ.

Actually I don't. I was trying to make a point about where is the best listening position. If sitting at a wall was equally good then surely you would expect to find a fair number of studios set up this way. But conversely, are you implying that we cannot learn something from audio professionals with multi-million dollar facilities?

Nor is it born out by my listening experiences.

No problem. This wins any debate hands down. If sitting with your head next to the back wall works for you then go for it.

Let me just add - I am not seeking to have an argument. I respect that you now have an entrenched opposing position here - so that is ok. I spent some time yesterday on what I thought was to provide some useful information to a fellow hobbyist that is all....you know, since you asked me. I'll stop here becuase there isn't really any point going further as your experience trumps anything I can provide.
halcro's avatar
halcro
2,664 posts
 
Shadorne, I'm happy to agree to differ as I respect most of the views you regularly post and in audio, what works for one often doesn't for another.
It's when you unequivicably state a position which you claim is FACT to other readers, which I believe cannot be substantiated, that I feel obliged to challenge.
A few closing points:-
Ethan's primary problems with reflections are in the bass region. If you read his article, you will know that the low frequencies will easily pass through uninsulated lightweight construction. The wall I sit against is stud-framed uninsulated. The low frequencies pass straight through as though it wasn't there just as they also do for the glass wall.
Mid to high frequency reflections are beneficial in many respects, to home listening experiences and the advantages of certain distances from these boundaries to the listening ear is a topic much too complex to tackle here.
Recording studios have different priorities from those of the home audiophile. One of those priorities is the initial sound wave, as can easily be appreciated, hence the importance on eliminating reflected sound almost entirely. This includes a back wall. There are some things we should not learn from audio professionals.
More to discover